Tam, C M; Tong, T K L and Wong, B W L (2007) An integrated system for earthmoving planning. Construction Management and Economics, 25(11), pp. 1127-1137. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
In earthmoving operations, there are a number of activities that need to be considered; for example, path identification, plant selection, assessing the compatibility of the paths and the plants so selected, cost and productivity comparison of alternatives, safety and environmental considerations, etc. The traditional approach to this problem by heuristic rules generated from the experience of planners cannot guarantee an optimal solution. Hence, a scientific method is proposed to automate the earthmoving planning by integrating: (1) a path-finding algorithm; (2) a plant selection system; (3) application of extenics theory to address the compatibility; and (4) the use of genetic algorithms to optimize the alternatives in terms of costs, productivity, safety and environmental considerations. The integrated system is illustrated step by step using a genuine construction project as an example. The result demonstrates the effectiveness of the system in automating the earthmoving planning exercise.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | automation; earthworks; extenics theory; genetic algorithms; integrated system |
| Index terms: | exercise, productivity, guarantee, earthmoving, automation, planner, construction project, heuristic, integrated system, earthwork, genetic algorithm, effectiveness |
| Subjects: | design methods, contract structure, construction methods, management, profession, health behaviours and lifestyles, risk assessment, performance management, production management, automation and robotics, algorithms, construction operations |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Design Practice, Procurement, Business Strategy, Quality Management, Roles and Professions, Site Management, Project Management, Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here